muses of the moment

October 5, 2012

R. Buckminster Fuller

Filed under: Buckminster "Bucky" Fuller, Odds 'n ends — totallygroovygirlfriday @ 2:21 pm

When groovygirl needs to think outside the box, which is most of the time to keep her motivated, she turns to Mr. Fuller.

Bucky knew how to ask questions to come up with innovated answers:

We must do away with the absolutely specious notion that everybody has to earn a living. It is a fact today that one in ten thousand of us can make a technological breakthrough capable of supporting all the rest. The youth of today are absolutely right in recognizing this nonsense of earning a living. We keep inventing jobs because of this false idea that everybody has to be employed at some kind of drudgery because, according to Malthusian-Darwinian theory, he must justify his right to exist. So we have inspectors of inspectors and people making instruments for inspectors to inspect inspectors. The true business of people should be to go back to school and think about whatever it was they were thinking about before somebody came along and told them they had to earn a living.

R Buckminster Fuller

The question: do we really have to work in the traditional sense of the word? Are we working for cash to support a system and structure that is no longer needed? What would it look like if 9 out of 10 people or 5 in 10 (soon to happen with the baby boomers in retirement) were not working in the traditional sense?

If no one did your job, would society as a whole suffer? If no one did your job, would an individual suffer? Have we exchanged paper pushers for electronic data pushers? Is it really productive or necessary?

This isn’t a Communist statement, this is beyond political.

Perhaps we work to distract us from realizing the current system is not necessary anymore?

Other Bucky quotes.

Another good one:

The Things to do are: the things that need doing, that you see need to be done, and that no one else seems to see need to be done. Then you will conceive your own way of doing that which needs to be done — that no one else has told you to do or how to do it. This will bring out the real you that often gets buried inside a character that has acquired a superficial array of behaviors induced or imposed by others on the individual.

And this:

Politicians are always realistically maneuvering for the next election. They are obsolete as fundamental problem-solvers.


Of course, our failures are a consequence of many factors, but possibly one of the most important is the fact that society operates on the theory that specialization is the key to success, not realizing that specialization precludes comprehensive thinking.

The notion of less, little, or no work to produce a yield is why groovygirl loves the concept of permaculture so much. Permaculture is the structure of a food system that requires little to no work for abundant, diverse yield for the current generation and generations to come. This is how nature wants to work.

There is no waste in nature.

Any other system from energy to financial to transportation to government can work this way too. But we must ask the right questions to get to these solutions. The first question is: is the current way of doing things the only way? Next: Is it there a better way? Next: does nature show us a better way?



  1. GG,

    Mr. Fuller seems a little presumptuous. He assumes that someone who makes a breakthrough capable of supporting the “rest” will, or even should be willing to support the “rest”.

    Here is an alternative view for those in high places who would take from the one who makes the “breakthrough” that they in their benevolence might provide that support to the “rest” by proxy:

    “Let him that stole steal no more: but rather let him labour, working with his hands the thing which is good, that he may have to give to him that needeth.” – Ephesians 4:28

    (i.e., let the politicians get a real job and give their own money to the needy rather than stealing from others to give to their constituent voter/slaves)

    “For even when we were with you, this we commanded you, that if any would not work, neither should he eat.”
    – II Thessalonians 3:10

    (not much virtue attributed to government welfare there)

    “And that ye study to be quiet, and to do your own business, and to work with your own hands, as we commanded you; That ye may walk honestly toward them that are without, and that ye may have lack of nothing.”
    – I Thessalonians 4:11, 12

    (we need to work and not be envious about how much someone else has or makes)

    And, perhaps the most appropriate for the subject:

    “And unto Adam he said, Because thou hast hearkened unto the voice of thy wife, and hast eaten of the tree, of which I commanded thee, saying, Thou shalt not eat of it: cursed is the ground for thy sake; in sorrow shalt thou eat of it all the days of thy life; Thorns also and thistles shall it bring forth to thee; and thou shalt eat the herb of the field; In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread, till thou return unto the ground; for out of it wast thou taken: for dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return.”
    – Genesis 3:17-19

    (i.e., attempts to not work for a living are really just another argument with God)

    As a friend of mine once said, “I reckon I will work until the Good Lord punches my time card”.


    Comment by Lemming — October 5, 2012 @ 2:46 pm

  2. Come on Lemming. The basis or economic base of society has moved on. God´s message to us is no longer rooted in the old testament. It´s rooted in Christ and his message is God as a father which is, or should be in the absence of tyranny ( what major “Union” isn´t – E.E.C.? U.S.A.? U.S.S.R.?), “LOVE of Father is his loving will.
    But then the message is lost if you´re rooted in the O.T. and consequently are not of a christian disposition. Even the Sufis see J.C. returning at the end times.
    The fact is that God, The Devil and the heavenly host are the entities that lie behind the numbers that number theory tell us about. A clue for you if you are thoughtful: God is one because it is the only prime number that is divisible into all the rest. If this leads to any illumination and fame I hope you would be honest enough to mention your source, deshepherd from

    Comment by Guy de Simon — October 5, 2012 @ 4:51 pm

  3. The argument used by Lemming is unsound. It read: ” He” (Mr. Lemming) “assumes that someone who makes a breakthrough capable of supporting the “rest” will, or even should be willing to support the “rest”.
    The answer to this argument is that the person who makes the beakthrough will reap the benefits (profit from his idea) during his life time, but after his life, society and not the illuminated investors (monopolists) should benefit from these ideas. As long as patents outlive the originater, then someone is profiting from society´s benefit and there is a scam going on that affected the judiciary.

    Comment by Guy de Simon — October 5, 2012 @ 5:07 pm

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

Create a free website or blog at

%d bloggers like this: